| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, denisa(dot)cirstescu(at)asentinel(dot)com, "pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Undocumented behavior od DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE |
| Date: | 2016-08-12 21:32:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20160812213205.GA717717@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > I think it'd be a good idea to add some more discoverability: what would
> > be deleted if an object X were to be deleted?
>
> There's plenty of discoverability already. The documentation suggests
>
> (If you want to check what <command>DROP ... CASCADE</> will do,
> run <command>DROP</> without <literal>CASCADE</> and read the
> <literal>DETAIL</> output.)
>
> Or you could do BEGIN; DROP ... CASCADE; ROLLBACK.
True, but the DETAIL is capped at 100 objects (per
reportDependentObjects); also, object locks need to be acquired, which
can be very troublesome if you discover that some frequently-used object
is in the set to be dropped, by some unfortunate accident.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-12 22:01:37 | Re: Undocumented behavior od DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-12 21:01:27 | Re: Undocumented behavior od DROP SCHEMA ... CASCADE |